Istilah syāz dalam penggunaan hadith dan fiqh: Analisis sejarah dan perbandingan antara disiplin

[The concept of shādh in hadith and fiqh: A historical and comparative study across disciplines]

Abstract

Istilah syāz merupakan antara konsep penting dalam ilmu hadith dan fiqh, namun penggunaannya berbeza mengikut disiplin. Kajian ini menelusuri perkembangan sejarah istilah syāz serta membandingkan penerapannya di sisi muhaddithīn dan fuqahā’. Menggunakan kaedah kualitatif melalui analisis kandungan karya klasik dan kontemporari, kajian mendapati bahawa muhaddithīn menekankan aspek teknikal sanad dan matan; sesuatu hadith dianggap syāz apabila berlaku percanggahan periwayatan dengan jalur yang lebih kukuh atau wujud tafarrud tanpa sokongan yang sahih. Sebaliknya, fuqahā’ menggunakan istilah ini dalam kerangka hukum; hadith dinilai syāz apabila kandungannya bercanggah dengan al-Quran, hadith mutawātir, ijmak atau realiti amalan umum, sekali gus menolak kebolehgunaannya dalam istinbat hukum walaupun tidak semestinya dianggap dhaif. Perbezaan ini menunjukkan bahawa syāz bukan hanya label teknikal, tetapi mencerminkan logik epistemologi kedua-dua disiplin: muhaddithīn menapis dari sudut ketepatan riwayat, manakala fuqahā’ dari sudut keserasian hukum. Justeru, pemahaman lintas-disiplin diperlukan agar polemik istilah ini dapat dirungkai secara harmonis dan diaplikasikan dengan lebih tepat dalam wacana keilmuan Islam kontemporari.

The term shādh is a significant concept in both hadith and fiqh, though its usage differs across disciplines. This study traces the historical development of the term and compares its application among the muhaddithīn and the fuqahā’. Employing a qualitative approach through content analysis of classical and contemporary works, the study finds that the muhaddithīn emphasize technical aspects of isnād and matn; a narration is deemed shādh when it contradicts more reliable transmissions or appears as an isolated report without authentic corroboration. In contrast, the fuqahā’ apply the term within a legal framework; a narration is considered shādh when its content conflicts with the Qur’an, mutawātir hadith, consensus, or established communal practice, thereby rejecting its usability in legal derivation, even if it is not necessarily classified as weak. These findings indicate that shādh is not merely a technical label but reflects the distinct epistemological logic of each discipline: the muhaddithīn focus on textual accuracy, while the fuqahā’ prioritize legal applicability. Thus, a cross-disciplinary understanding is essential to harmonize the polemics of this term and to ensure its more precise application in contemporary Islamic scholarship.